36
submitted 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) by cmeerw@programming.dev to c/cpp@programming.dev
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] lysdexic@programming.dev 0 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

From the article.

Josh Aas, co-founder and executive director of the Internet Security Research Group (ISRG), which oversees a memory safety initiative called Prossimo, last year told The Register that while it's theoretically possible to write memory-safe C++, that's not happening in real-world scenarios because C++ was not designed from the ground up for memory safety.

That baseless claim doesn't pass the smell check. Just because a feature was not rolled out in the mid-90s would that mean that it's not available today? Utter nonsense.

If your paycheck is highly dependent on pushing a specific tool, of course you have a vested interest in diving head-first in a denial pool.

But cargo cult mentality is here to stay.

[-] BB_C@programming.dev 4 points 1 month ago

The only (arguably*) baseless claim in that quote is this part:

it’s theoretically possible to write memory-safe C++

Maybe try to write more humbly and less fanatically, since you don't seem to be that knowledgable about anything (experienced in other threads too).

* It's "theoretically possible" to write memory-safe assembly if we bend contextual meanings enough.

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (22 replies)
this post was submitted on 17 Sep 2024
36 points (95.0% liked)

C++

1732 readers
3 users here now

The center for all discussion and news regarding C++.

Rules

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS